If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   Best Korea: It is ON. United Nations: No, no it's not "on." It's never been "on." It's off   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 243
    More: Obvious, Korean War, Rodong Sinmun, United Nations General Assembly, U.N. Security Council, North Korea  
•       •       •

23294 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Mar 2013 at 4:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



243 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-11 06:27:58 PM

Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?


Feasible, yes. Depending what platform you launch it from. Even if you catch the NKs sleeping, they'd still have time to launch from their missile base in the north, which means they can still hit Japan, Alaska, South Korea. You'd still be having a drawn-out artillery duel until you obtain air supremacy. And given my ideal placement of SAMs, and depending on how clever the North Korean pilots are, that might be longer than we would think. (Still really short, since their airforce would be horribly outnumbered. They might not even deploy their airforce until they -had- to.
 
2013-03-11 06:28:39 PM

Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?


Well, that or a fire ship. I do hope that our planners actually have a plan to take out the artillery positions rapidly. Supposedly there aren't actually that many that can hit Seoul, and they have had 60 years to map them out and identify the fake ones.
 
2013-03-11 06:36:09 PM
Technically, with an armistice, its never been "off".
More accurately, its a pause to reload.
 
2013-03-11 06:37:47 PM

Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.


Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.
 
2013-03-11 06:42:50 PM

StaleCoffee: I speak on the subject backed by ironclad speculations and personal conjecture.


Not to mention the mighty run on sentence...
 
2013-03-11 06:44:16 PM

KangTheMad: Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?

Feasible, yes. Depending what platform you launch it from. Even if you catch the NKs sleeping, they'd still have time to launch from their missile base in the north, which means they can still hit Japan, Alaska, South Korea. You'd still be having a drawn-out artillery duel until you obtain air supremacy. And given my ideal placement of SAMs, and depending on how clever the North Korean pilots are, that might be longer than we would think. (Still really short, since their airforce would be horribly outnumbered. They might not even deploy their airforce until they -had- to.


I would think China might step in with an invasion just to prevent the US from taking over a country and setting up shop directly on their border.
 
2013-03-11 06:45:44 PM

I should be in the kitchen: I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.


From everything I've read about how NK treats its citizens being killed by American bombing might not be the worst thing to happen to them today.
 
2013-03-11 06:48:04 PM

I should be in the kitchen: Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.

Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.


As horrible as a war in Korea would be, if it results in the end of the Kim dynasty, it'll be far better for the North Korean people in the long term.

Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown.  I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.
 
2013-03-11 06:49:55 PM

KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not


Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.
 
2013-03-11 06:54:46 PM

jake_lex: Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown. I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.


Yea personally I find it hard to believe he is as cooky as the old man. He was educated in Switzerland; right? So he literally has first hand knowledge that the west isn't as bad as the picture that is painted.
 
2013-03-11 06:54:50 PM
Something tells me there's a 100% chance North Korea's missile would accidentally blow up in the lab killing everyone and leveling an entire city.
 
2013-03-11 06:56:50 PM
All this sabre rattling suggests the young-un must be getting some challenge from within.
 
2013-03-11 06:58:30 PM
Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?
 
2013-03-11 06:59:21 PM

Clash City Farker: vygramul: realmolo: You have to wonder if China is saying to itself "We really should kill this guy and put our own guy in there".

The Chinese are evil, but they aren't stupid, and they don't like being associated with stupid.

Dunno - they can be slooooow to learn. I mean, seriously, no joke, in 1980, they decided that runners weren't cutting it in their war against Vietnam, and that they should probably look into this "radio" thing everyone keeps talking about.

/Even CHINA lost to Vietnam

Everyone loses to Vietnam. The Mongols lost to Vietnam for gods sake. Vietnam has this book. Whenever they get attacked they open the book and it tells them what to do to defend themselves. Mostly it involves digging lots of holes and putting down pointy sticks.



Damnit, I never learned how to defend myself against pointed sticks.  The teacher kept focusing on different kinds of fresh fruit, every single class.  I'm totally ready if anyone every attacks me with loganberries, though.
 
2013-03-11 07:00:04 PM

RandomRandom: It's not just a refugee crisis that South Korea is really worried about, it's the NK's 5000 hardened artillery positions within firing range of Seoul.  If NK gets hit bombed by the west, even a little, even just the nuke sites, the north will probably start firing shells at Seoul.

How long would it take us to disable Five Thousand long-range artillery pieces, each embedded in its own hardened concrete bunker?  Not hours, days would be the best case, a week would be most accurate.  Getting through hardened concrete takes a direct hit from a large, directed munition.  Drones might help, repeated counter-battery might work, eventually, but one suspects most of the heavy lifting would be done by manned aircraft and laser guided 2,000 lb bombs.  5,000 is a lot of sorties.

Here's the big deal.  How many shots would the NK howitzers get off before being destroyed?  Modern artillery can fire a few rounds a minute, but lets say that each of the 5000 fire just 1 round per minute and are - on average, destroyed after just one hour of firing.

Using that artificially low rate of fire and terribly optimistic rate of destroying their guns, it would still result in 300,000 high explosive and incendiary shells hitting Seoul in the first hour of fighting.   After the first hour of fighting, Seoul would look like Dresden.  If the war came on fast, in response to say, a surprise attack by the west, a good proportion of Seoul's 25 million population would see their last day on earth.

It's not Best Korea's nukes that have everyone in the South worried, it's their half-century old gun tech.  Which unless we have some new technology hidden away that is able to instantly disable 5000 howitzers, the chances of a preemptive strike against the north's nukes is about as close to 0% as it gets.


you're assuming they could afford rounds for all the guns(assuming all those guns actually exist), that are in good shape and won't A: detonate in the barrel, or B: dud on impact, assuming the guns were maintained in anything other than a 'slap some paint on it so the inspection passes' way.

again assuming all the guns were real.

honestly best way is as discussed in thread: use thermobaric rounds targeted on the various gun-sites. those positions are well plotted. it only takes a few seconds to traverse a howitzer, and a well trained crew can crack off a round every 4-5 seconds at maximum fire rates. assuming a battalion worth of guns being what, about 40-50 howitzers, one round every ten seconds per gun amounts to 240-300 rounds in the air every MINUTE. 5000 gun sites would take a bare 20 minutes to cover. with a single battalion. throw in another and it starts looking pretty damn bleak.

and, as a follow-up act, have them do a second barrage, say three rounds per site, of cluster mine-layer munitions, a 70-30% mix of anti-personnel to anti-vehicle.

first you fry em, then you make em PAY to take the guns back.
 
2013-03-11 07:00:39 PM
i2.cdn.turner.com

I like how the Norks have Rodman practically sitting on the floor so it's not so evident he's a foot taller than Little Fat Man.
 
2013-03-11 07:01:26 PM

alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?


Teach them how to make garments, running shoes, and plastic toys.  They'll work for peanut shells.
Profit!!!
 
2013-03-11 07:02:33 PM

KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.


zerg rush.
 
2013-03-11 07:03:37 PM

This text is now purple: KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

zerg rush.


Tunnels
 
2013-03-11 07:04:43 PM

JK47: Balance. Because of the threat the DPRK poses the US maintains an enhanced military presence in the region. China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones. A large US presence reassures China's neighbors to some extent (that American forces would intervene if they are attacked).


The concept that Americans just aren't that interested in a war, and whitey can't tell any of them apart anyhow, so they don't care about whose ancient ancestor took advantage of who?

Interesting concept.
 
2013-03-11 07:05:01 PM

toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.


I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.
 
2013-03-11 07:05:32 PM

Stone Meadow: [i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

I like how the Norks have Rodman practically sitting on the floor so it's not so evident he's a foot taller than Little Fat Man.


i.walmartimages.com
 
2013-03-11 07:09:36 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.


Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?
 
2013-03-11 07:13:13 PM

jake_lex: I should be in the kitchen: Dr. Goldshnoz: I know it was foolish of me, but I was really hopeful kim jong un would do more than the constant retarded sabre rattling his father was known for.

Same here. Although so far, it's been hard to take Un seriously as any kind of threat.

I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.

As horrible as a war in Korea would be, if it results in the end of the Kim dynasty, it'll be far better for the North Korean people in the long term.

Usually, "regime change" backfires in the end and the new leader turns out to be about as bad, if not worse, than the original leader that got overthrown.  I can't see, though, how anyone would be worse for North Korea than this family of sociopaths.


That is true. And I really hope something happens soon to end that dynasty, because I don't see things getting better for the people until it does. And even then, who knows, but I don't think we can even hope for things to improve over there til the Kims are gone.
 
2013-03-11 07:14:32 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I should be in the kitchen: I almost hope he does try something, just to see that little troll squashed like a bug, but I don't want harm to come to NK civilians.

From everything I've read about how NK treats its citizens being killed by American bombing might not be the worst thing to happen to them today.


Sad but true.
 
2013-03-11 07:14:51 PM

meat0918: This text is now purple: KangTheMad: Except the Korean DMZ is the most heavily fortified border in the world with thousands of landmines. You would need a ton of engineering vehicles just to not have to go through single file.

zerg rush.

Tunnels


Excuse me

Nydus Tunnels.
 
2013-03-11 07:15:18 PM

KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.


Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

www.squidmobile.com
 
2013-03-11 07:16:50 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.

Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?


FTFY.

Have you not seen the Best Korea at night picture. There's like one place with lights and that's probably only coming from the little Uns and his buddies houses.
 
2013-03-11 07:17:23 PM

KarmicDisaster: Hot Carl To Go: KarmicDisaster: RandomRandom:
Then there's the anti artillary tech you mentioned.  Lasers are in testing, but the Israeli's have missile based system currently in use.  The problem once again is expense.  Each shot of the Israeli systems costs something upwards of $100k and each battery has a very expensive tracking system.  Even if the laser based system were ready today, one imagines that its firing rate would be little higher than the artillery against which it's defending.  Meaning you'd need 5000 individual anti artillery laser systems to counter the NK threat, more if you wanted a backstop for any ...

I know nothing but I wonder about a synchronized cruise missile attack on the artillery positions. They can be exceedingly accurate, of course, and that might be enough to circumvent any hardening of the emplacements; fly it right in the window. At the first sign of trouble, launch them all to strike simultaneously, and hit their exposed missile launch sites too. I guess that I don't know enough about what kinds/sizes of warheads are available.

Sounds feasible to this armchair general. I think it might be cost prohibitive though. Can't we just sail a plague ship into their harbor?

Well, that or a fire ship. I do hope that our planners actually have a plan to take out the artillery positions rapidly. Supposedly there aren't actually that many that can hit Seoul, and they have had 60 years to map them out and identify the fake ones.


For the past decades, the conventional wisdom has been that the north has at least 5000 hardened emplacements within firing range of Seoul, even more outside that range.  Some may be dummies, but even if half were dummies and were identified as such, the problem would still be hugely troublesome, nearly as intractable.

Cruise missiles could certainly do the job, but 5000 would come close to wiping out the entire US arsenal of all cruise missile types.  Since they cost a million or more each, it would be a 5 billion dollar first strike.  Some percentage of them would fail to make it to target and some targets would survive the hit and need to be hit again.  Were only 10% to fail to take out their targets, the remaining artillery could still devastate Seoul.

Worst, it would be impossible to fire all those cruise missiles at once.  Many of our cruise types can only be fired from certain platforms, we don't have enough platforms to fire 5000 at once.  Even if we moved all our B52's to Japan or South Korea, it's unlikely we could fire more than 1000 at once.  Knocking out just 20% of their artillery in a surprise attack would allow the remaining 80% to completely destroy Seoul.

Were we to go after NK, we'd have to use a technology that could hit every emplacement withing minutes, and probably hit each multiple times.  This suggests a weapon system with over 10,000 individually guided warheads.  The technology most able to do that today would be a great many batteries of precision guided rockets featuring exotic warheads.  No GPS, all internally guided.  Since this is military tech, it would be ungodly expensive.
 
2013-03-11 07:29:22 PM

Radioactive Ass: Noticeably F.A.T.: WhoopAssWayne: Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border.

Would there be that many refugees? I'm honestly asking, I'm a bit ignorant on the subject so I know I'm missing something. Let's say some infrastructure and the leadership was bombed. Outside of some of the folks used to living in the cities, aren't most of the people used to living without the infrastructure, and could get along without the leaders (until some new leaders were in place)? Or would they just be leaving for the sake of leaving, because now they can?

FTFY.

Have you not seen the Best Korea at night picture. There's like one place with lights and that's probably only coming from the little Uns and his buddies houses.


Take a look at Pyongyang on Google Earth. They have streets, but very few cars. It looks like a ghost town.
 
2013-03-11 07:33:20 PM

This text is now purple: JK47: Balance. Because of the threat the DPRK poses the US maintains an enhanced military presence in the region. China believes that the presence of American forces in the region helps to stabilize what would otherwise be a cauldron of intense and bitter rivalries with historical and ethnic overtones. A large US presence reassures China's neighbors to some extent (that American forces would intervene if they are attacked).

The concept that Americans just aren't that interested in a war, and whitey can't tell any of them apart anyhow, so they don't care about whose ancient ancestor took advantage of who?

Interesting concept.



Compared to the rivalries between China and it's neighbors, the United States just isn't that antagonistic.
 
2013-03-11 07:40:50 PM
China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.
 
2013-03-11 07:50:04 PM

Yogimus: China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.


Taiwan.
 
2013-03-11 07:50:37 PM

mysticcat: i2.cdn.turner.com

Seoul brothers


One is a delusional nutbag who lives in his own warped little world surrounded by Yes Men and needs a great big "NO!" shoved up his ass.

And the other is Kim Jong Un.
 
2013-03-11 07:51:17 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: Would there be that many refugees?


It's a really interesting question. China and South Korea are booming economically, and given the industrious nature of Koreans in general, it's almost assured they would have a better life if they tried to immigrate. The question is, do they really understand the stark disparity in fortunes? If some bold North Koreans decide to go, would it kick off a larger movement? Would many feel inclinded to stay put out of Juche/patriotism they've been indoctrinated with their entire lives? Your premise is right on - there is huge uncertainty regarding the scale of any immigration. The risk of millions pouring over the border, both in China and Seoul, is very real and it's always taken into account when dealing with North Korea.
 
2013-03-11 07:55:24 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Shrugging Atlas: China would probably thank us at this rate.

Just like Seoul, China really, really, really doesn't want millions of refugees pouring over the border. I think they'd be pretty pissed if we whistled up the B-2s. But of course, sometimes you just have to bomb the sh*t out of a place, because that's the way it is.


And what really has China's scrotum tied in a knot is that they can't spill across the border like they did in the 50's to save their crazy Korean neighbor. If they did, all of their assets in the US could be seized, their bank accounts frozen,  and they can farking forget ever seeing one more penny in loan payments ever again. The Yuan would be Charmin overnight.

China has far more to lose this time if they meddle.
 
2013-03-11 07:57:45 PM

EvilEgg: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Put up or shut up, tubby

You might feel differently if you lived in Seoul.


I'm way north of Seoul. As a matter of fact a have to visit the DMZ this evening. No worries here.

/pray for Omarion
 
2013-03-11 07:57:53 PM

vygramul: Yogimus: China would LOVE seeing north korea removed, because it would negate our reasons to keep a fleet outside their waters.

Taiwan.


Exactly, it would force us into a more concrete stance on the matter.
 
2013-03-11 07:58:10 PM

KiwDaWabbit: I still say that they're doing all of this posturing to secure Kim Jong Un's legitmacy so maybe he can initiate the reconciliation process without being overthrown.

Or, maybe that's more what I hope, because I question his tactics at the moment.


I'll buy that.  His people have been told for so long that "THE WEST IS EVIL!  EEEEEEVIL!" that the True Believers might take him out if he makes motions for peace.  It's a different situation than Japan had in 1945 (when Hirohito wanted to end the war but feared being overthrown by his cabinet/military commanders) but in both cases the only real way to deal with the drastic situation is a drastic move.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.  Hopefully not interesting in the Chinese curse way.
 
2013-03-11 08:00:21 PM

MyKingdomForYourHorse: [grapplersplanet.com image 464x600]


Holy crap, wings and beefy arms.  Must be part-Trogdor.
 
2013-03-11 08:09:18 PM

TV's Vinnie: And what really has China's scrotum tied in a knot is that they can't spill across the border like they did in the 50's to save their crazy Korean neighbor.


Well put. The economic entanglements may just be too intertwined for them to give any substantive military response.
 
2013-03-11 08:12:38 PM
Damn it did South Korea dance back! I hope the UN told them not to dance back.
 
2013-03-11 08:13:42 PM
Way to make a pointless argument UN!
 
2013-03-11 08:14:44 PM

toraque: KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.

Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

[www.squidmobile.com image 600x400]


Ummmmmmm yellow cake!
 
2013-03-11 08:14:50 PM

alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?


Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.
 
2013-03-11 08:15:44 PM

sleeper2995: toraque: KangTheMad: toraque: KangTheMad: If I was a NK military defense planner, which fortunately I am not

Why 'fortunately'? It sounds like it's a pretty easy job. A couple hours in the morning screaming at Worst Koreans across the DMZ, execute a few guys by mortar afterwards, and cook up some ludicrous provocations before lunch and you're done for the day.

I'll be executed when, not if, I eat Kim Jong Un's cake.

Just remember one simple rule in Best Korea:

[www.squidmobile.com image 600x400]

Ummmmmmm yellow cake!


lucyactually.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-11 08:19:12 PM
I had a little home that junior would be a little more level headed, what with all that European education. That is now long gone.

Maybe China will give the big baby a time out. I don't know that anyone could make it worse over there.
 
2013-03-11 08:24:20 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.


Yeah, because that's never led to any genocidal people gaining absolute power in their country before.
 
2013-03-11 08:28:18 PM

efgeise: JohnAnnArbor: Japan could be required to give billions of aid as well to help.  Call it war reparations or something.

Yeah, because that's never led to any genocidal people gaining absolute power in their country before.


Oh, what's the worst that could happen?
 
2013-03-11 08:41:04 PM

jm105: alice_600: Okay I wanna ask the arm chair generals: What do you do with the people of North Korea after the war to rebuild?

Send in the Germans. They handled their own reunification well enough.


I have thought about that as a model. One pretty substantial difference is that West Germany had the world's fourth largest GDP in under three decades after World War II ended. I think also, and this is just conjecture on my part, that Germany was under a lot more scrutiny in the beginning phases of the reunification due to what Germany had done to the world less than fifty years before.

While there are a lot of similarities between Germany and Korea, there are also a lot of substantial differences, some of which are generational. Germany's split lasted roughly forty five years, which is a long time, but I'm sure there were some people who were around before the end of the war and potentially even before the war itself started. If you're in North Korea and under the age of 65, you haven't known a head of state who wasn't a Kim.

I want to think that North Korea doesn't want armed conflict. We all realize that they could go down in a "blaze of glory" and decimate Seoul, but to what end? What's left of North Korea will be commandeered and the whole God-King deal will be over.
 
Displayed 50 of 243 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report